House Financial Services Committee Takes Aim at HUD Programs to Reduce Deficit

Is chipping away further at Department of Housing and Urban Development programs a viable way to reduce the deficit? A recent House Financial Services Committee letter of recommendation says that many of HUD’s programs are duplicative or inefficient, and the programs are a good place to cut expenditures.

Under its recommendations to reduce expenditures, the committee states, “The Federal housing programs administered by HUD have historically been characterized by a high degree of inefficiency and duplication, and government watchdog organizations like HUD’s Office of Inspector General and the Government Accountability Office have issued multiple reports over the years exposing waste, fraud and abuse at the agency. Yet HUD’s annual budget has increased steadily in recent years, rising from $31.92 billion in FY 2005 to $46.99 billion in FY 2010.”

The committee goes on to outline 12 HUD programs that it says have fallen short of their goals including NeighborWorks, for which it says the Joint Select Committee should consider eliminating funding, citing duplicative HUD programs.


Additionally, the committee recommends eliminating the FHA Refinance Program, Home Affordable Modification Program and Neighborhood Stabilization Program, among others.

Finally, the letter states that Dodd-Frank needs examining.

“The most significant impediment to economic growth that falls within the Financial Services Committee’s jurisdiction is the Dodd-Frank Act,” it states. “…some 15 months after it was enacted, many small businesses are starved for customers and credit; unemployment has soared to more than 9%; and for far too many American families, economic security seems farther away than ever.”

View the letter.

Written by Elizabeth Ecker

Join the Conversation (5)

see all

This is a professional community. Please use discretion when posting a comment.

  • The HUD budget is even more difficult to swallow when some of the functions within HUD have supposedly been transferred to the new but every costly CFPB. 
    For those who worried and fretted that Republicans wanted to destroy FHA, here is your answer.  Republicans as a group want to reduce the wild growth in government and government spending.  During the recent Bush years, it lost sight of that mission and suffered as a result.
    Where Democrats are failing the nation is not getting us out of worldwide conflicts.  Like the models of Afghanistan and Viet Nam, our observing advisors in the Central African Republic – Congo regional conflict are now escalating into combatant observing advisors.  We are spread out so thin militarily that Iran is beginning to treat us like a paper tiger.
    What our nation needs is a strong focus on jobs, housing, and current deficit (combined with long-term debt) reduction, not war.  We are not the Roman Empire which militarily raids our neighbors to feed our masses.

  • Judging from the direct impact that Dodd-Frank has had on our business and customers, it’s a very poorly drafted document that has damaged business, borrowers, and the housing market.  For example, why are we prohibited from picking up borrowers’ costs, like appraisals, etc, or negotiating with customers?  I was told that was considered “enticing the borrower”.  Isn’t enticing a customer to do business with you rather than the competition what running any business is all about, and doesn’t that end up benefiting the customer?  How does this prohibition benefit the borrower?  It has only increased borrowers’ costs and reduced access to credit.

    • Lance,

      You are now talking like a CPA.  You do not seem to understand, real costs do not matter (LOL).  It is what we are told which matters.  Accountability and reality are for inferior minds (LOL). 

      If you do not believe me just look at how Ms. Warren rationalized the need for the CFPB on the late night shows and comedy shows.  All the CFPB was trying to do is bring transparency and clarity.  That is it!!!


      • Lmao Zorro!……….  There are those in DC that appear determined to restructure the business practices of the entire country without an understanding of the damage they are doing.  A particularly glib speechmaker comes to mind.  And I am glad that Ms. Warren was vetted out, though I did give her a chance at first.

      • Lance,

        Our President make it clear from the start.  His election was all about hope.  If you make everything as bad as it can possibly be in 2 plus years what is left?  HOPE.


string(123) ""

Share your opinion